Surfers, Sewage and the New Politics of Pollution

Surfers, Sewage and the New Politics of PollutionAuthor(s): Neil WardSource: Area, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Sep., 1996), pp. 331-338Published by: The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20003711 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 07:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) is collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Area.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.79.40 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 07:42:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rgs

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20003711?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Area (1996) 28.3, 331-338

Surfers, sewage and the new politics of pollution

Neil Ward, Department of Geography, University of Newcastle upon Tyne,

Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU

Summary The beach is becoming a zone of conflict over the risks from bathing in contaminated seawater. This paper examines the politicisation of beach pollution, concentrating on the emergence of a new form of oppositional politics associated with the reflexive practices of Britain 's fastest growing environmental group, Surfers Against Sewage.

Introduction: changing notions of the beach

Over the past two hundred years, there have been profound shifts in what Shields (1991) calls the ' social spatialisation ' of the beach-the way that the beach as a

geographical zone is socially constructed through social imagery. These shifts may

be characterised, in the British context in particular, as a movement from seeing

the beach as a medicinal zone to a zone of pleasure and, more recently, to one of

pollution. The eighteenth century saw a considerable increase in sea bathing

originating in spa towns such as Scarborough-for ' its medicinal properties and as

a general pick-me-up ' (Urry 1990, 17). The whole point of sea bathing was to 'do one good '. The rise of the seaside resort and mass tourism in Victorian times

changed this view of the beach from a medicinal, health-giving zone to a zone of

pleasure. More recently, however, the notion of equating the beach with health has

been further undermined, if not overturned. Because of rising concerns about the

public health risks associated with bathing in seawater contaminated with sewage, the

beach has now emerged as a zone of political conflict around a major environmental

and public health controversy. This paper examines the politicisation of bathing water pollution in Britain,

concentrating in particular on the emergence of a new form of oppositional politics. It first introduces a recent characterisation of social and cultural change which has

brought the issue of ' reflexivity ', risk management and environmental protection to

greater prominence in the social sciences, and goes on to describe the changing nature of coastal pollution policy and politics in Britain, exploring the specific contribution of what claims to be Britain's fastest growing environmental pressure

group, Surfers Against Sewage, to this ' new politics of pollution'.

Reflexivity and the new politics of pollution

Increasing public concern to protect local environments has recently been explained in terms of an increasing ' reflexivity ' in response to the uncertainties and anxieties

fostered by globalisation. In this sense, reflexivity implies that people are becoming less constrained by existing institutions and ' are now in a position to shape the

process of modernisation rather than simply following pre-established patterns of behaviour' (Irwin 1995, 44, emphasis in original) For Lash and Urry such' reflexive modernization ' means that ' social agents are increasingly ' set free ' from the . ..



332 Ward

control or monitoring of social structures in order to be self-monitoring or

self-reflexive ' (Lash and Urry 1994, 4-5). Associated with this shift in socio-political life, and of particular importance in the field of environmental politics, is a

breakdown of trust in ' expert systems ' which opens up a space for critical reflexivity and the tendency for an increasingly individualised lay public to question the assumptions of science and the expert systems themselves. Reflexivity in this sense derives from the work of Beck (1992a, 1992b) and Giddens (1991, 1994). Beck's ' risk society ' thesis highlights a shift from industrial society to risk society, where political conflicts once arose around the distribution of goods, whereas now they revolve more around the distribution of ' bads ' (ie risks and hazards). Industrial society saw the emergence of human-made risks, but was characterised by a social consensus around progress, giving rise to a normative system of ' rules for social accountability, compensation and precaution ' (Beck 1992b, 100). In the risk society, risks become the ' axial principle ' of social organisation while, at the same time, the limitations of science become increasingly visible. Until the risk society, a simple modernisation

model dominated social and political discourse. Now, according to Beck, we have entered a phase of reflexive modernization with the possibility for individuals to reflect critically, and hence potentially to change, their social conditions. A key resource in the risk society is knowledge, and so the struggle between actors to define

what risk is becomes crucial. Beck's notion of reflexivity is primarily cognitive, but Lash and Urry suggest that

the aesthetic dimension cannot be ignored. For them, aesthetic reflexivity entails not only self-monitoring, but also the interpretation of self and of social practices. Reflexivity is characteristic of what they describe as a new structural disorder dominated by flows (of information, commodities and images). In the environmental controversies of the risk society, Lash and Urry argue, ' people's attitudes and sensibilities are aesthetically and expressively formed ' (Lash and Urry 1994, 37).

Urry (1995) has added that people are increasingly active in protesting and protecting those sites (such as buildings, habitats, parks, beaches and pieces of land) that symbolise and signify the place that they feel they belong to or believe says something about them as individuals. Linked to this, we can see the development of new communities, not necessarily in geographical proximity, but around other issues such as lifestyle networks or single issue political pressure groups.

In the light of these characterisations of socio-political change this paper considers the issue of sewage pollution of Britain's coastal waters. The changing nature of environmental politics can be understood in terms of growing reflexivity, in both a cognitive and an aesthetic sense, and a breakdown of trust in expert systems. Certain features of the ' new politics of pollution ' in Britain, most particularly the

Europeanisation of pollution regulation, have also helped create the opportunities for new, reflexive forms of political practice to thrive. The paper therefore provides a case study example of reflexivity in action, a case study that illustrates how groups are able to create fresh pressures and perspectives on the management of an environmental issue. These strategies have been made possible because European environmental directives have required that bathing waters be regularly sampled and tested with monitoring results made publicly available.

Sewage discharge and coastal pollution policy

Pollution has traditionally been seen as primarily a technical rather than a moral or political problem (Weale 1992). As a result, much of the debate about pollution has



Surfers, sewage and the new politics of pollution 333

been set within a technical discourse with expertise an important strategic resource to be used by protagonists. The technical discourse surrounding pollution affects the character of the policy community and means that rational science is prominent. In addition, pollution control in Britain has traditionally been dominated by administrative, as opposed to legal, regulatory strategies (Maloney and Richardson 1994). Such strategies allow government officials wide administrative discretion and have tended to foster close relations between the regulator and the regulated in the drawing up and implementation of policy.

Since the 1970s, however, traditional practices and structures have increasingly come under challenge. By the late 1980s, what Weale (1992) calls a ' new politics of pollution ' was emerging as the previously small and self-contained policy community expanded and diversified. In England and Wales, this change was facilitated by the drawing up and implementation of proposals to privatise the regional water authorities (Maloney and Richardson 1994). First, environmental and consumer groups began to adopt a more proactive role in the formulation of pollution policy, their increasing size, resources and experience enabling them to demonstrate technical competence and challenge the very premises of policy. Secondly, the

European Union and its institutions became increasingly important actors. The European Commission, in particular, had been energetic in drafting a plethora of directives setting standards for air and water quality since the 1970s. Many of these directives required implementation by the mid-1980s and so began to form an important part of Britain's national pollution control legislation. The challenge of finding the resources required to improve the infrastructure of Britain's water industry in order to meet European standards therefore provided an important stimulus to privatisation. Crucially, however, these events helped open up the space for new groups to engage in water pollution politics.

In this context, sewage discharge to coastal waters emerged as a public and political controversy. The disposal of sewage from coastal settlements had tradition ally been dominated by a ' dilute and disperse ' philosophy. The turbulent tidal

waters around Britain were considered to provide a cheap and effective means of sewage disposal, and so sewage was discharged to sea, often through short outfall pipes and with little or no treatment. This practice came under challenge following the adoption of the European Bathing Waters Directive (76/160) in 1976. The

Directive aims to maintain or raise the quality of bathing waters over time for public health and amenity reasons. It lists 19 different parameters, although it is those for total and faecal coliforms that are generally used to assess compliance.' Against these parameters are two values; 'I' (Imperative, or Mandatory) values and ' G '

(Guideline) values. Member States are legally obliged to set values which bathing waters must meet, and these values must be no less stringent than the 'I' values. Member States should also ' endeavour to observe ' the more stringent 'G' values but these are not legally enforceable.

The Bathing Waters Directive has attracted much attention in the UK, in the first instance because of the Government's seeming unwillingness to designate waters in accordance with the spirit of the Directive. The quality of Britain's bathing waters and the degree of progress in moving towards meeting the standards laid down in the

Directive have been the subject of regular national media coverage. There has also been an ongoing public debate around the appropriateness of the Directive's standards, the costs of meeting them and, more recently, the appropriateness of the

Directive for protecting all recreational users of coastal waters. The high profile of the issue in public and political life can be attributed to two factors. First is the



334 Ward

regular publication of bathing water monitoring results, arising from implementation of the Directive, which provides 'newsworthy ' material and an easily recognisable ' yardstick ' against which the UK's progress towards solving its coastal pollution

problems can be measured. For example, as the results for each season's monitoring become available, the proportion of waters which comply with the Directive can be assessed against previous years. The second factor concerns the activities of environmental groups that campaign on coastal water quality issues and continually strive to keep the issue on the public and political agenda.

The results of the water quality monitoring required by the Directive provide the basis for a widely used and well regarded bathing water classification system produced by the Marine Conservation Society (MCS). Implementation of the Directive means that the MCS can now denounce ' failed ' beaches in a way that

earlier environmental campaigns, such as that mounted by the Coastal Anti-Pollution League, previously could not. The League had for many years campaigned against coastal sewage pollution, although fear of being sued by coastal authorities had prevented it for denouncing contaminated beaches. Instead it produced a cyclostyled and little noticed guide to 'Britain's Golden Beaches '. Until the Bathing Waters

Directive's standards were in place, there was no statutory yardstick against which coastal pollution could be judged and authoritatively confirmed. Once the Directive established a yardstick and the requirement to monitor, MCS were able to draw upon the results and publish an annual ' Good Beach Guide' (MCS 1994) listing the quality of Britain's bathing beaches according to its own criteria. Such information is widely reported in the national press, often in the form of ' league tables '

highlighting ' MCS recommended ' beaches. This process is a good example of reflexivity in practice as knowledge and information is used as a resource through

which a pressure group is able to redefine the nature and scale of an environmental pollution problem. The Directive has also provided the legal norms which allowed campaigners to present the pollutions of bathing waters as a breach of the law. In this

sense, it is European law that defines what constitutes ' polluted ' water, with ' Europe ' providing a new type of ' court of appeal ' for environmental pressure

groups to pursue their grievances, ' by-passing ' central government where need be. The explicit standards provided by the Bathing Waters Directive have also

catalysed a shift in the style of political management of coastal sewage discharges. The previous regulatory style based on administrative discretion, flexibility and pragmatism fostered a style of political management characterised by internal administrative management within relatively closed policy communities, discreet lobbying and a lack of transparency in decision making. However, the Bathing

Waters Directive now furnishes a yardstick against which outsiders can judge progress and performance. The regular publication of information on compliance with standards has meant that the issue of sewage pollution of coastal waters has been

opened up as a focus for oppositional politics and debate. It is only as a result of the Directive and the legal obligation to meet its standards that environmental campaigns can be mounted with such effect. If local environmental actors are able to point to

specific breaches of European law, their campaigns are much more likely to feature in public and political debate. The issue of environmental degradation is thereby turned into an indictment of government. The Directive yields knowledge and information about the environmental quality of bathing waters, but at the same time

helps in the redefinition of pollution as a legal issue. It provides a new means by which groups can exercise critical reflexivity and create new spaces for political action. Not only can groups draw upon detailed monitoring information to




demonstrate the spread and levels of contamination of bathing waters, but also the

notion of a' failed ' or ' illegally-polluted 'bathing water can be employed by groups

to emphasise the existence of an environmental or public health ' problem', thus

breaking the grip of those closed, expert systems previously able to dismiss the issue.

Surfers Against Sewage and the politics of coastal clean up

Among the recent entrants to the debate about the pollution of coastal waters are

Surfers Against Sewage (SAS), who campaign to influence water companies and

policy-makers to improve coastal water quality. SAS was set up in May 1990 after a

small group of Cornish surfers met to discuss their concerns about local sewage

pollution on the north Cornish coast. An initial public meeting attracted 200 people

and SAS soon grew to become a national pressure group. In the subsequent five

years, membership grew to almost 20,000 (Falconer 1995). SAS have campaigned to

raise public awareness about the scale of the problem of sewage pollution through

high profile media stunts. Local and national media are alerted to polluted bathing

waters, especially those shown to fail the Bathing Waters Directive's standards, and

surfers pose in wet-suits with Greenpeace-style gas-masks and a ten feet long,

inflatable ' turd ' emblazoned with their logo. These stunts have been highly effective

in attracting widespread media coverage of both SAS's campaign and the issue of

coastal pollution more generally. Sympathetic politicians sometimes join the surfers in the water. (For example, the Liberal Democrat MP, Simon Hughes, appeared in

a wetsuit alongside SAS campaigners in a photograph on the front cover of the

Observer newspaper (29.5.94) in one such stunt). SAS have also purchased shares in

the privatised water companies as a means of gaining access to their annual general meetings, arguing that this provides the opportunity to press their case with the

water companies' shareholders and financiers. They point to a study published in the

British Medical Journal in 1991 which found that surfers were 80 per cent more

likely to experience ear, nose and throat infections and gastro-intestinal symptoms

compared to people who did not enter the water (Balarajan et al 1991). The group have a range of complaints about the problem of coastal pollution and

the British Government's response to it. Some complaints specifically concern the

way that the Bathing Waters Directive has been interpreted and implemented in

Britain and relate to: the (non-) designation of beaches frequented by surfers; the

restricted nature of water sampling (both spatially and temporally); the standards

used to assess compliance and the British strategy for complying with the Directive

(see SAS 1994). Many beaches frequented by surfers are not designated under the

Directive. As a result, SAS claim that the Directive does not adequately protect

surfers. A letter to the European Commission raising this issue prompted the

response that ' surfing is not the same as bathing ' and that the Directive was never

intended to protect surfers. SAS argue that the dictionary definition of the word 'bathe' is ' to immerse in liquid '. ' We immerse ourselves in liquid all the time, far

more often and for far longer than people who go bathing, and the Directive lets us

down hugely' (SAS interview).2 A second complaint is that the sampling under the

Directive provides only a very poor indicator of the level of pollution and the

associated health risks involved in entering the water. Because sampling is restricted

to a specified summer bathing season running from May to September, SAS argue that surfers are unfairly excluded from the protection the Directive ought to offer.

The increasing availability of low cost wetsuits means that people can now spend much longer periods in the water.3 (Some surfers may spend several hours of contact



336 Ward

time in the water in one day). Wetsuits also enable bathing and watersports outside the formal bathing season, with wetsuited surfers comfortably using bathing waters until December.

SAS also argue that the coliform standards used to assess compliance with the Bathing Waters Directive are inappropriate to adequately protect health. They would prefer the Guideline standards to be used instead of the Mandatory standards (which are twenty times less strict). At the moment the Government is able to claim that 80 per cent of designated bathing waters comply with the Directive. However, SAS argue that this 80 per cent only comply with the bare legal minimum to avoid breaching European law. Water quality remains below the Guideline standard in the vast majority of waters and SAS claim that even beaches that pass the Directive's legal minimum standards continue to pose significant health risks. Moreover, only two of the Directive's 19 parameters are applied to assess compliance, and these are, according to SAS, also the two easiest ones to pass (faecal and total coliforms). Coliforms die off in a matter of hours in salt water while other sewage-related contaminants such as enteroviruses and hepatitis survive for much longer.

SAS argue that current investment in relatively low levels of sewage treatment is driven by the need only to meet the Directive's Mandatory values and would prefer sewage treatment schemes to be designed to minimise the pollution load of sewage prior to discharge into the sea. For example, Jersey has an ultra-violet treatment scheme and the effluent discharged from the outfall pipe has a coliform count of less than 10 per 100 ml, a level of contamination 1000 times lower than many British

waters that are able to pass Directive (Wyer et al 1994). This treated effluent is in the pipe, before it has even been dispersed or diluted. SAS's General Secretary explained, ' I'd feel 1000 times safer going for a swim in their outfall pipe than I would on a UK Government passed beach' (interview).

The political controversy surrounding the pollution of bathing waters revolves around the costs and benefits associated with regulation to reduce the health risks from sea bathing. SAS complain that surfers and other users are facing unacceptable risks and that water companies should be required to invest more in improved sewage treatment prior to discharge. In 1994 they put their case to the House of

Lords Select Committee on the European Communities which was examining proposals to reform the Bathing Waters Directive published by the European Commission in February 1994 (House of Lords 1994; 1995). Elements of SAS's critique of the current regulatory framework and operation of the Directive were accepted by the Committee in their conclusions and were subsequently aired by peers on the floor of the House (Hansard, 18 May 1995, Cols 684-708). In addition, the group have made submissions to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission (MMC) to seek to influence its investigation into South West Water's appeal over the new regulatory framework governing water charges to customers. SAS's argument that there should be no increase in water charges and no slow down of the coastal clean up programme in the region was accepted by the MMC when its decision was announced in July 1995.

Thus the campaign by Surfers Against Sewage, as a form of more oppositional pollution politics, has helped bring them to the heart of policy debates in Britain around measures to control coastal pollution. Their rapidly rising profile and

membership would seem to resonate with the general accounts of socio-political change of Giddens, Beck and Lash and Urry introduce above. Indicative of Beck's risk society, the politics of coastal pollution centrally concern the distribution of ' bads ' (ie health risks) rather than ' goods '. Similarly, in accordance with Lash and




Urry's notion of aesthetic reflexivity, surfers appear increasingly active in protesting over those sites (ie beaches) that signify where they feel they belong. For example, the General Secretary of SAS explained in the Green Magazine in June 1993 (Green

Magazine 1993, 31-2) ' with surfing you have a very intimate relationship with the sea. You're constantly looking at it to see what it's doing. Surfing is not a hobby like squash. You're in there and involved ... The sport is a celebration of something

wonderful. The sea '. Through their campaigning, SAS employ the empirical material generated by

implementation of the Bathing Waters Directive to help redefine the beach as a zone of pollution and risk. (In addition, members are continually reminded to document and report any illness suffered following surfing in an attempt to compile information on the scale of the health-threat problem national). In press articles and in their own

magazine for members, Pipeline News, the sea is frequently linked with notions of unpleasant and hazardous sewage contamination. The vivid imagery of the surfer in-gas-mask powerfully makes the link and attracts media attention. Indeed, SAS acknowledge that ' image is very much part of our success and has been the reason for so much media interest ' (SAS 1995, 19).

Conclusions

In the early days of the growth of the British seaside resort, the whole point of bathing in the sea was ' to do one good '. The notion of the beach as an efficacious place can be starkly contrasted with perceptions in the 1990s which characterise the polluted beach as a place of contamination and risk. For example, a recent headline in a Sunday newspaper reporting on research carried out for the Departments of

Environment and Health proclaimed 'Britain's dirty beaches can make you sick'

(Independent on Sunday, 30.1.94). Riding the wave of the new world of flows and signs depicted by Lash and Urry

(1994), environmental pressure groups like Surfers Against Sewage are now able to engage in confrontational and highly media-oriented campaigns to address the issue of sewage pollution. (See Beder (1991) for an interesting parallel account of the

attempts by Australian surfers to overcome the efforts of regulatory authorities to ' close 'a similar pollution controversy). Importantly, such groups are now able to use the Bathing Waters Directive to bring pressure to bear to improve the quality of

bathing waters. The publicly available monitoring data means that groups can become both ' knowledgeable ' about the issue, and more proactive in their political cam

paigns. The Directive provides the legal norms which allow the campaigners to present the pollution of some bathing waters as a breach of the law. In this sense, Europe (or more specifically the European Commission) becomes the moral arbiter of what constitutes polluted water and environmental groups are thus able to appeal to Europe as a greater state authority and the guarantor of water quality. Critical and reflexive use of the monitoring data (through drawing attention to failed beaches, for

example), is being employed in an effort, not only to highlight the link between pollution and health risk, but also to bring pressure to bear for real regulatory change.

The regulatory style of the 1970s and early 1980s based on administrative discretion, flexibility and pragmatism fostered a style of political management characterised by internal administrative practices within relatively closed policy communities, discreet lobbying and a lack of transparency in decision making (Maloney and Richardson 1994). However, closed, expert systems are being undermined and the issue of sewage pollution of coastal waters has been opened



338 Ward

up by pressure groups as a focus for oppositional politics and debate. In doing so, groups like Surfers Against Sewage, through their media-oriented campaigning in particular, are helping to shift our understandings of the very nature of the beach.

Notes

1 Faecal coliforms are a bacterial contaminant used as indicator organisms because their presence in

seawater is taken to demonstrate the presence of sewage pollution.

2 Interviews were conducted during 1993 and 1994 with a range of actors involved in and affected by, the

implementation of European environmental directives, including environmental pressure groups, water industry representatives, national and local government officials and regulatory officials in the National

Rivers Authority. The Surfers Against Sewage interview material quoted here derives from an interview with SAS's General Secretary. Further research for this paper has involved documentary analysis of

Surfers Against Sewage's evidence to Parliamentary Select Committees, press releases and its magazine

for members, Pipeline News. 3 According to SAS, who argue that wetsuits are ' radically changing the way we view and use our

coastline ' (1994, 48), Europe's largest wetsuit manufacturer has estimated that the UK market for

wetsuits among committed surfers and windsurfers numbers around 1 million people.

Acknowledgments

This paper draws on material gathered for the British part of a five-nation research project funded by the

European Commission's Directorate-General XII. The project, entitled ' Conditions for the Integration of European Environmental Policy at the Local Level', was conducted between 1993 and 1995 in Britain, France, Germany, Greece and Spain. I would like to acknowledge gratefully the European Commission's funding of the research, and thank Alastair Bonnett, Chris Hamnett, Jonathan Murdoch, Tim O'Riordan

and two anonymous referees for their comments on an earlier draft of the paper.

References Balarajan R, Soni Raleigh V, Yuen P, Wheeler D, Machin D and Cartwright R (1991) 'Health risks

associated with bathing in sea water ' British Medical Journal 303, 1444-5

Beck U (1992a) Risk society: Towards a new modernity, (Sage Publications, London)

Beck U (1992b) ' From industrial society to risk society: questions of survival, structure and ecological

enlightenment' Theory, Culture and Society 9, 97-123 Beder S (1991) ' Controversy and closure: Sydney's beaches in crisis ' Social Studies of Science 21, 223-56

Falconer K (1995) ' Sun, sea, sand and faecal streptococci: What do we want out of Britain's beaches ' The

Independent (Weekend section) 29 July, p 9

Giddens A (1991) Modernity and self identity, (Polity, Cambridge) Giddens A (1994) 'Industrialization, ecology and the development of life politics' in D'Antonio W,

Sasaki M and Yonebayashi Y (eds) Ecology, society and the quality of social life (Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick) 1-10

House of Lords Select Committee on the European Communities (1994) Bathing water, HL Paper 6-I, (HMSO, London)

House of Lords Select Committee on the European Communities (1995) Bathing water revisited, HL Paper

41, (HMSO, London) Irwin A (1995) Citizen science: A study ofpeople, expertise and sustainable development, (Routledge, London)

Lash S and Urry J (1994) Economies of signs and space (Sage Publications, London)

Maloney W and Richardson J (1994) 'Water policy making in England and Wales: Policy communities

under pressure? ' Environmental Politics 3, 110-38

Shields R (1991) Places on the margin: Alternative geographies of modernity (Routledge, London)

Surfers Against Sewage (1994) 'Evidence to the Select Committee, in House of Lords Select Committee

on the European Communities' Bathing water HL Paper 6-I (HMSO, London) 47-57

Surfers Against Sewage (1995) ' Image related success ' Pipeline News No 20, p 19

Urry J (1990) The tourist gaze (Sage, London)

Urry J (1995) Consuming places (Routledge, London)

Weale A (1992) The new politics of pollution (Manchester University Press, Manchester)

Wyer M, Jackson G, Kay D, Yeo J and Dawson H (1994) 'An assessment of the impact of inland surface

water input to the bacteriological quality of coastal waters ' Journal of the Institution of Waters and Environmental Management 8, 459-67



Surfers, Sewage and the New Politics of Pollution

Documents

Transcript of Surfers, Sewage and the New Politics of Pollution